[M_L] Re: Languages with writing systems?

Re: "Degrees of written"

Peter, all, I'm getting back to this slowly but a lot of the traffic
in the thread seems to have gone elsewhere.

The fact of transcribing a language may or may not make that system of
transcription widespread. I understand your point about why create the
system if one doesn't plan to make it known & used. But there are
other factors that can make the issue more complex.

For instance, in some cases the system developed for writing has not
been widely used. There are also cases where different missionary
groups have written the same language with different systems of
transcription, as well as cases where government agencies have revised
single standard transcriptions one or more times, and where
individuals or groups have resorted to workarounds on computers when
the available fonts didn't accommodate whatever transcription would
have been appropriate. Not even to mention cases where alternate
scripts were or are used.

So, maybe there are really 2 questions:
1. Has the language been given a writing system? In this case, the
response would be 0 or 1 ; IOW, has it ever been put to writing?
2. Is it a "written language" in the sense that writing is established
to one degree or another? In this case there might be such
considerations as (a) standardization, (b) familiarity of speakers
with the, or any one of the systems of writing, and (c) production in
writing (any system). The latter could be as complicated as one
wanted, but some reasonable degrees of distinction might be helpful.

I think the original question was #1, but the data Sangeetaa mentioned
that purports to respond to that question may not use consistent
criteria (?).

My question about "degrees of written" is intended to suggest that a
more complex index might be helpful for applied work: literacy,
development of materials or web content in a language, localization, etc.

Don

--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...> wrote:
>
> The missionary enterprise generally includes instruction for the
locals in reading their new Bible books, for what would be the purpose
otherwise of translating them?
>
> Presumably the SIL itself publishes reports on its literacy
activities. But it can't be denied that several levels of
already-written languages would prove more important in the long run,
including regional, national, lingua franca, and metropolitan languages.
> --
> Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Don Osborn <dzo@...>
> To: qalam@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 7:59:54 PM
> Subject: [M_L] Re: Languages with writing systems?
>
> Thanks, Peter. Any thoughts on "degrees of written" or classifications
> of how well established a writing system is? It's one thing to have an
> orthography or a Bible sections (often the first thing printed) in a
> particular language - but if it's not taught in schools and literacy
> rates in it are low, one could argue that the writing system however
> valid or appropriate, is not (well) established.
>
> It's not an idle question. I recently had a correspondence about
> writing systems in Nigeria (for languages other than the 3
> "decamillionaires" ) in which it was suggested that the orthographies
> had been changing in large part due to what available fonts on
> available computer sytems would permit.
>
> There are also of course languages with competing orthographies (here
> speaking of Latin-based ones introduced by different groups such as
> missionaries; this is a slightly different case than that of Amazight
> where there are 3 totally different scripts involved for historical
> reasons).
>
> BTW, I misquoted the Ethnologue URL which is actually
> http://www.ethnolog ue.com
>
> Don
>
> --- In qalam@... com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@ ..> wrote:
> >
> > The most useful source I know for the number of written languages is
> the United Bible Societies' catalog of the languages of the world into
> which at least one book of the Bible has been translated. The most
> recent edition I have, from 1990 [the orange one], lists 1,946 such
> languages; one more was published [the green one], but it's sold out,
> and now they only put the information on their website any more.
> >
> > Thus given Ethnologue's maximal number of languages around 6000, and
> the UBS's minimal number of written languages around 2000 (likely
> significantly more than that by now), the number of the world's
> languages with writing systems must be something over 1/3.
> >
> > I once tried to list all the different writing systems currently in
> use (counting all the uses of Roman, Cyrillic, and Arabic as 1 each,
> and counting Japanese as 1) and came up with about 32 (depending on
> how many ones of very limited use like Cherokee and Pahawh Hmong you
> want to include) -- somewhere between 30 and 35.
> > --
> > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@ .
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Don Osborn <dzo@>
> > To: qalam@... com
> > Cc: Sangeeta Bagga-Gupta <sangeeta.bagga- gupta@ >
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 6:11:50 PM
> > Subject: FW: [M_L] Re: Languages with writing systems?
> >
> > One of the members of the Multilingual_ Literacy group, Sangeeta
> Bagga-Gupta
> > of Ãrebro University in Sweden, asked about the number of the world's
> > languages that have writing systems. You may want to jump past my
windy
> > comments to her original question below. TIA for any feedback.
> >
> > Don Osborn
> >
> > From: Multilingual_ Literacy@ yahoogroups. com
> > [mailto:Multilingua l_ Literacy@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Don
> Osborn
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 5:14 PM
> > To: Multilingual_ Literacy@ yahoogroups. com
> > Subject: [M_L] Re: Languages with writing systems?
> >
> > Hi Sangeeta, As a short answer to your question, I don't know of any
> > authoritative estimates of the number (or %) of languages with writing
> > systems, though I suspect that there may be no simple answer. Here are
> > a few thoughts along that line.
> >
> > First, the number of 6000-7000 languages often mentioned in the press
> > and academic literature is the count of the well-known resource,
> > Ethnologue http://www.ethnolog ue.org/ which tends to count variant
> > forms of a language as separate.
> >
> > All of this goes back to the definition of a "language" so a second
> > thought is that in the case of various "dialects" the issue of whether
> > there is a standard form of the language is another issue. The case of
> > Arabic may be a particular or extreme example, but Ethnologue counts
> > about 20 "languages" for Arabic - there are significant differences
> > among the spoken colloquial varieties, but there is really only one
> > standard written form. So on the one hand, one might say that Arabic
> > is counts as 100% (=1/1) in tallying the number of languages with a
> > writing system in the world, but on the other hand, perhaps it
> > accounts for 4-5% since, from what I am told, it is not common to
> > write the colloquial speech. I think that there are a number of other
> > languages are in more or less similar situations (several "languages"
> > closely related, of which only one is written to any appreciable
> extent).
> >
> > Other readers please correct me on details in the case of Arabic, but
> > if you consider that one might be able to write any of the colloquial
> > varieties, even though this might not be done, then the issue is
> > clouded further. That is a third thought.
> >
> > Fourth, and getting closer to the point that (as I understand it)
> > concerns Sangeeta, there are certainly a lot of languages that have
> > been put to writing relatively recently, such that (1) the system of
> > writing is not widely known, (2) there are competing systems of
> > writing, or (3) the only writing is that done by some researchers of
> > one sort or another. This set of circumstances is particularly common
> > across Africa, but certainly observed elsewhere. It is aggravated in
> > some cases by educational policies or the lack of language planning.
> >
> > All of this is something I'm thinking about and communicating with
> > colleagues about. Having seen a proposed system for classifying
> > languages according to the technical resources available for them
> > (tau, mu and pi languages), I am inclined to think that it would be
> > very helpful to have a similar sort of classification about writing
> > and languages - that is the degree of establishment and use of written
> > forms of a language. It does not seem to have a simple answer like x%
> > or y% of languages having writing systems - it all depends on what one
> > means by "having a writing system" or what it means to be a "written
> > language." And this is much like the criteria for definition of what
> > is a "language" itself (i.e., separate language as opposed to dialect
> > of a language etc.). (I guess this counts as #5)
> >
> > Another (sixth) thought is a question: how do you deal with languages
> > with written traditions in more than one alphabet, such as Amazight
> > (Berber)? Admittedly this is an easier question, but it points to
> > another level of complexity.
> >
> > A seventh and final thought is the definition of a "writing system."
> > Although we take it to mean something that can represent the spoken
> > language or a full range of thought comparable to the spoken language,
> > there are some who define written systems more widely to include
> > various symbols with meaning that may be used individually or in
> > combinations to express certain things.
> >
> > I'm sorry if this clouds the issue more than clarifies, but at the
> > moment it seems like this is the reality.
> >
> > I'll forward this to another list - Qalam - that deals specifically
> > with writing systems to see what kind of responses it gets there.
> >
> > All the best!
> >
> > Don
> >
> > --- In Multilingual_ Literacy@ yahoogroups. com, "Don Osborn" <dzo@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Sangeeta Bagga-Gupta has a question very pertinent to discussing
> > > multilingual literacy, and that is the number of languages with
> > > writing systems. I will offer some thoughts later, but in the
> > > meantime, encourage others to reply as well. DZO
> > >
> > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---
> > >
> > > I have a query to the members of the Multilingual literacy
discussion
> > > group. I have a source that puts the figure of number of
languages in
> > > the world today to around 6000. The number of languages with a
written
> > > system is often put to 100-120. I bumped into another source
recently
> > > that suggests that 10-12 procent of the worlds known languages
have a
> > > written system. The latter seems way too many. I'd be very happy to
> > > hear from list members of what estimates they are aware of. I'd also
> > > be very happy to get references to sources.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Sangeeta
> > >
> > > --
> > > Associate Professor/Docent
> > > Department of Education/Pedagogis ka institutionen Communication,
> > > Culture & Diversity - Deaf Studies (KKOM-DS) Research Group Ãrebro
> > > University SE 701 82 Ãrebro Sweden
> > >
> > > http://www.oru se/pi/sangeeta
> > >
> >
----------------------